The Legacy canopy design is not unsafe or inadequate and does the job exactly as Lancair intended. In all my training in the Legacy, attention to the canopy has always been stressed. It’s a check list item and as in my military jet, a verification item by pushing on the canopy prior to takeoff. After the tragic Lakeland accident Lancair incorporated an additional canopy safety warning into the design.  If a builder wants to change the design, that’s a judgment call.

I don’t believe there is a case of a “secured” canopy opening in flight and it has been demonstrated here, the plane can be flown with the canopy open.  These are high performance airplanes, deserve respect and require skill to operate. Yes, some pilots failed to secure their canopies before fight. Some recovered their airplanes and some had lesser results.

Human factors are the issue here and unfortunately, failures will occur. Failure to use checklists or missing items, rushing, complacency and non-standard procedures, continuing takeoffs with the canopy unsecured, operating on runways with insufficient Accelerate Stop Distances, etc.

I am concerned how a paper like this may be perceived. Will it scare off potential builders and buyers or be interpreted to indicate a design flaw?   I don’t believe this paper presents anything new or unknown.  As far as I know, there is no record of an in-flight breakup or failure of a Legacy, yet the airframe has developed a certain reputation by biting a few unwary pilots, but just how does this paper help?

FWIW

Jon